Guns ‘N’ Rosé beer

Rock band Guns N' Roses has been an established name for decades. Its popularity hasn't faded, given the 17 million followers on Facebook. The band holds three American trademark registrations GUNS N' ROSES, one of them for clothing. In 2018 the Californian brewery Oskar Blues launches a beer under the name Guns 'N' Rosé, along with all kinds of merchandise, such as caps, stickers, bandanas etcetera. The band objects.

The trademark application is refused, but the brewery refuses to take the products off the market, saying it wants to sell out stock until March 2020. Enough reason for the band to start a lawsuit in California. Consumers may think that the beer is linked economically to the band. Not unusual in the scene, given the ties between bands like AC/DC, Deftones, Anthrax and Iron Maiden with alcoholic beverages. The case has just started and the brewery hasn't responded yet. Taking advantage from the reputation of well-known bands and brands seems attractive, but it is not without risk. (source image: filed complaint USA)

trademarks



Latest news
Rituals vs. The Body Shop: Battle of the Brands
The Bulldog rightly claims damages from Red Bull
Trademark Escobar parfum contrary to public order
Abcor team in World Trademark Review 1000
Louis Keijzer passes BBMM exam with flying colours
Our Clients
Follow Abcor
claimant
defendant
claimant
defendant

IP quiz Trademarks

Puma is one of the bigger sports and lifestyle brands in the world. The core-business is the design, development and sale of (sports) shoes, (sports) clothing and accessories. In 1960, Puma registered an international trademark for a device designed in 1958: the formstrip. Since then, Puma has registered approximately 90 formstrip trademarks with validity in the Benelux or the European Union. Puma claims that this is a serial mark. Monshoe is a wholesaler of women's shoes and related products. The company designs and develops Monshoe shoes which it largely markets itself. Monshoe sells its women's shoes under the brands Shoecolate and Pearlz. The shoe Shoecolate is offered in various colour combinations. Puma claims that Monshoe infringes its well-known formstrip trademark. Monshoe contradicts this and states that the average consumer will not perceive the device of Monshoe on the sneakers as a trademark. And if the public will recognize a trademark in the decoration, it will not make the connection to Puma. According to Monshoe, the formstrip logo is not a well-known trademark within the meaning of the BVIE and the UMVo. There is no likelihood of confusion because the sign does not or hardly evoke any association with Puma among the public. In light of the above, who is right? Does this constitute decorative use or linking to a well-known trademark?